WritersBeat.com
 

Go Back   WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table

The Intellectual Table Discussions on political topics, social issues, current affairs, etc.


Monroe Bergdorf

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 09-13-2017, 05:08 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,842
Thanks: 361
Thanks 846
Default


Originally Posted by Myers View Post
It took you 30 minutes to read this???

Well, I can see why you might think we spent a lot of time here...

.


I read slow. Skimming is not an option for me. Plus I had to go back and read the whole thread because I wasn't sure how we got where we got.

Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-13-2017, 05:14 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

I'm a slow reader too. But maybe I had an advantage because I read it as it evolved.

It doesn't take any more than a few minutes to knock out one of these posts. I supposed if I added it up it might be 30 mins total.

If it's more, so what?

As long as I meet my deadlines, I can fuck around as much as I want -- which is one of the reason I work for myself.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-13-2017, 05:16 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,842
Thanks: 361
Thanks 846
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
I'm a slow reader too. But maybe I had an advantage because I read it as it evolved.

It doesn't take any more than a few minutes to knock out one of these posts. I supposed if I added it up it might be 30 mins total.

If it's more, so what?

As long as I meet my deadlines, I can fuck around as much as I want -- which is one of the reason I work for myself.


Heh. Yeah. I should have went to college and got a job that doesn't require me to drive 100 miles a day to multiple locations all over the Phoenix metro area.😀
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-13-2017, 05:23 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Yeah, maybe you should have.

Naw -- I'm in a pretty unique position to have this kind of flexibility. Even when I've worked for agencies, I've had a lot of autonomy -- bosses who were mostly laissez faire.

There was a guy on this forum who questioned the time I spent here. I could tell from his level of intelligence and what he said about his job that I could have bought and sold the fucker ten times over.

And he was like -- oh, I bet you work at Trader Joe's...
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-13-2017, 05:32 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,842
Thanks: 361
Thanks 846
Default

Ha ha!

I work at Trader Joe's all the time. And Sprouts and Whole Foods too😀

I think I'd go insane if I had a lot of free time. I'm not built for that. I complain about my job in passing, as a joke, but it is what I was made for. I get bored easily, and it's not good when I do.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-13-2017, 05:43 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Heh.

Well -- there is nothing wrong with working at Trader Joe's.

This guy was an idiot and a hypocrite -- championing the working man, but when he had to criticize me, that was the biggest insult he could come up with.

But I'm talking about someone who believed in poison contrails and that long red lights were a conspiracy of the oil companies.

When I was first married with a kid on the way and trying to get established, I delivered sandwiches for Jimmy Johns. People were like, oh, what if you knock on a door and it's someone you know? I was like, who gives a shit -- that's their hang up not mine.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-13-2017, 06:06 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

BTW -- I don't have any "free time."

I'm betting as a business owner, you don't either. Not really.

It's just a matter of deciding how much time you can afford to not spend on your business -- servicing clients or going after new ones.

Striking the balance is a very hard thing to learn...

Last edited by Myers; 09-13-2017 at 06:08 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-13-2017, 06:41 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,842
Thanks: 361
Thanks 846
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
BTW -- I don't have any "free time."

I'm betting as a business owner, you don't either. Not really.

It's just a matter of deciding how much time you can afford to not spend on your business -- servicing clients or going after new ones.

Striking the balance is a very hard thing to learn...


When I had six trucks running in the early 2000's I had what people would call 'free time', but yeah, it wasn't really free time. I was always working. I didn't do much actual plumbing but bouncing from job to job, running parts to guys, meeting contractors and homeowners for bids, collecting money from 'late-payers', and all the rest.

It's easier now, because a lot of work can be done from an iPhone.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-13-2017, 07:08 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

There was a time when on some level, I measured success by how many people had working for me. What nonsense!

I spent more time managing people than doing what I do best -- and what I really enjoy.

But the key to my business success?

I don't hire coloreds or Mexicans. I might hire an Asian or a Jew because they work hard and they're good with money, respectively.

I've hired young women if they are very talented, but I know it's a matter of time before they'll want to start squeezing out babies and I'm going to have to give them a bunch of time off.

Old people? Forget about it. They ran out of fresh ideas a long time ago.

Luckily, I hire contract and freelance people. I can selectively bring on clever, young white men -- people just like me -- and I can totally get away with it.

Last edited by Myers; 09-13-2017 at 07:36 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-13-2017, 08:17 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,842
Thanks: 361
Thanks 846
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
There was a time when on some level, I measured success by how many people had working for me. What nonsense!

I spent more time managing people than doing what I do best -- and what I really enjoy.

But the key to my business success?

I don't hire coloreds or Mexicans. I might hire an Asian or a Jew because they work hard and they're good with money, respectively.

I've hired young women if they are very talented, but I know it's a matter of time before they'll want to start squeezing out babies and I'm going to have to give them a bunch of time off.

Old people? Forget about it. They ran out of fresh ideas a long time ago.

Luckily, I hire contract and freelance people. I can selectively bring on clever, young white men -- people just like me -- and I can totally get away with it.


When in Rome...
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 09-14-2017, 12:34 AM
PickleBottom's Avatar
PickleBottom (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,980
Thanks: 1,312
Thanks 377
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Indeed.

There are a couple problems with Munroe's kind of thinking. And it mainly comes down to what I was taught as a kid — my mum gave me a little mini bio of Martin Luther King when I was 10. The message is simple, we don’t want special treatment or consideration, we only wish that judgment is based only on one’s actions and the content of one’s character.

Once we start from this principle we cannot find someone guilty by association because of their skin colour, which is exactly what this thinking does. I think the test for whether someone is actually principled or not is whether they can be objective in its application even when it is inconvenient.

So I can’t be judged based on the actions of others, historical or otherwise.

Second problem, judging people by the actions of their state, empire, and suggesting that one cannot have admiration for the good, because it is somehow inextricable from the bad. Think of ANY internationally successful culture/nation. There is none in history which isn’t steeped in racism, violence, atrocity and oppression. Ottoman empire, Imperial China, Islamic conquests, Japanese expansion, Soviet Russia etc etc. By this standard, no one can have pride in ‘their people’, and must only feel shame, should they wish not to contribute towards racism.

Third problem, the standard for racism. You cannot have a standard which says 'racism is not doing anything about racism' unless it's specifically within your job description. I'm not guilty of theft, or supportive of theft if I don't chase down the thief... I'm guilty of theft if I steal shit, and I won't be called a thief otherwise.
You make some very good points, but if a political party and /or the people in power base their platform on hatred towards a group of people, this paradigm becomes a reality for the people who make up the minority group. This can be observed across the whole world against various minority groups, regardless of the specific characteristics of the people in charge. Unfortunately any wishful thinking by the minority group will not lead towards less discrimination, and tragically these "problems" are trivial to solve.

But to look at the issue in a positive light, there will always be the consequences of these actions, they don't ever seem to go away - which is a good thing, as much more reflection and meditation should be required before the people in power declare hatred towards another group of people.
__________________
If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these apples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas
-George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-14-2017, 04:34 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

That is a good point -- and we are definitely seeing that now here in the U.S.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Myers For This Useful Post:
PickleBottom (09-14-2017)
  #43  
Old 09-20-2017, 06:49 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,847
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Yeah, maybe you should have.

Naw -- I'm in a pretty unique position to have this kind of flexibility. Even when I've worked for agencies, I've had a lot of autonomy -- bosses who were mostly laissez faire.

There was a guy on this forum who questioned the time I spent here. I could tell from his level of intelligence and what he said about his job that I could have bought and sold the fucker ten times over.

And he was like -- oh, I bet you work at Trader Joe's...
that's kinda funny. I spent time on a forum with someone who's screen name was I_AM_AT_MY_JOB. Someone who had a beef with him tracked him his company email and sent a nasty gram, in the hopes of getting I_AM_AT_MY_JOB fired. As it turned out, I-Am ran his own business, and posted the email requesting that he get fired, it was a running joke for a while.

I've worked at LassieFare places, and at nose to the grindstone salt mines where they monitored every ones internet usage.

My newest job is reasonably Lassie Fare, but the work load and pace that I've accepted keeps me very busy from six in the morning until late afternoon. My last job had chunks of work and chunks of down down time .
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-20-2017, 07:11 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,847
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Yep, I'm gonna throw this one into the mix.

L'oreal model whose employment I believe was based on taking part in a campaign to celebrate diversity within the fashion/beauty world and beyond was sacked for posting the below. It has caused a pretty large uproar in the UK and led to innumerable articles as well as television and radio interviews featuring Monroe debating whether the decision was warranted.

Quote below:

‘Honestly I don’t have energy to talk about the racial violence of white people any more. Yes ALL white people.

‘Because most of ya’ll don’t even realise or refuse to acknowledge that your existence, privilege and success as a race is built on the backs, blood and death of people of colour. Your entire existence is drenched in racism. From micro-aggressions to terrorism, you guys built the blueprint for this s***.

‘Come see me when you realise that racism isn’t learned, it’s inherited and consciously or unconsciously passed down through privilege.

‘Once white people begin to admit that their race is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on Earth… then we can talk.

‘Until then stay acting shocked about how the world continues to stay f***** at the hands of your ancestors and your heads that remain buried in the sand with hands over your ears.’

Now this was said in response I believe to the violence in Charlottesville for any of those who might consider that relevant.

For all the things Whites are supposed to be privileged for, that someone can accuse me of racial violence, without me having to do or say anything, is so unenviable to me that I'd rather be black. I don't know if that has anything to do with me being mixed race, but so is Munroe...

Thoughts?
I don't view this as a smart or courageous stand. As others have noted White people have done some horrendous things to others. A lot of others have to.

Slavery was around a long time before black Africans were brought to the Americas, and some realize that the word Slave comes from Slav- because so many European (and other areas) had slaves from the Slavic regions.

Slavery is still practiced worldwide, and wherever it's practiced is an abomination.

A more courageous shout out would be to denounce slavery in places that it's happening - in all its forms. Name the current practitioners, even if it's not politically correct or safe to do so.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-21-2017, 02:17 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by PickleBottom View Post
You make some very good points, but if a political party and /or the people in power base their platform on hatred towards a group of people, this paradigm becomes a reality for the people who make up the minority group.
So we're saying that a political party in power has based its platform on hatred towards minorities... in the US? In France? In the UK?

Realistically this kind of party or group is relegated to fringe extremism in modern politics. I need to see some kind of codified discriminatory policies before I can really identify an expressly racist regime. This stuff about maybe enforcing border control doesn't really cut it...

There is something quite sinister I think in labelling the wave of 'populism' in its various forms as a racist or fascist movement. They did the same with Brexit. It's probably just another way for largely rich white men to sully the opposition and gain power for themselves rather than any rigorous political analyses. It's like a tick, just call something racist/homophobic/sexist enough times and the SJW's will take to the streets with their placards.

Originally Posted by PickleBottom View Post
This can be observed across the whole world against various minority groups, regardless of the specific characteristics of the people in charge. Unfortunately any wishful thinking by the minority group will not lead towards less discrimination, and tragically these "problems" are trivial to solve.
Sure, and that's one of my main points. Racism and discrimination is not monopolised by white people. Imagine, say, that the Trump government were to confiscate black owned businesses. And for these businesses to be given as gifts to various members of the Republican Party. It would necessarily provoke outrage from anyone who was against what was clearly a racist programme. Yet no heart bleeding for white farmers in SA and Zimbabwe...

Again if you're actually principled, then it's the principle, not the colour.

To go further... my other point was that it's not necessarily majority power, or white power, but power in general. Plenty of occasions minorities have ruled the majority. Take Saddam's Iraq.. a Sunni regime which discriminated against the majority Shia population. After the war Shiites took power and the balanced was reversed leading to Sunni led violence and eventually ISIS. All the same race.

In South Africa the majority, blacks, had it bad under Apartheid. But it's not like the regime is now your friend just because a black government is in charge. If the Apartheid government had ordered to shoot a bunch of protesting black miners we'd call it racism... but that was on the ANC's watch, so then we just call it state power doing what it does, which is closer to reality.

My final point is that I am absolutely convinced that equality of opportunity and/or outcome has never been something you can legislate for (that's not to say you can't legislate against it). It's up to people whether they are to remove their prejudices or not. You can't make people interact with each other in whatever way you'd like according to your preferences, all you can do morally is ensure that is no force employed in these interactions.

In short, power is an end in itself, its goal is more power, and it only discriminates based on what it perceives as a threat towards that goal. And you can't legislate love.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.

Last edited by JohnConstantine; 09-21-2017 at 02:21 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 09-21-2017, 04:59 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
So we're saying that a political party in power has based its platform on hatred towards minorities... in the US? In France? In the UK?
"Based a platform" would be an overstatement -- but to a large number of Trump supporters -- not all of course -- hatred (or at the very least mistrust and prejudice) toward minorities was part of the appeal. See The Wall and the Muslim ban he talked about during the campaign.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 09-24-2017, 02:04 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,847
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

Some of the people that voted for tRUMP are racists.

Some of the people that voted tor Hillary are racists.

Hillary's husband and her husband's VP courted racists, especially in the 1992 election.

If some of tRUMP's supporters are racist, then some supporters for The Wall are racist.

A lot are not, and what those on the "other side" can't seem to see is branding all who oppose the wall as racists is counterproductive - if unity is what you are seeking. If you are seeking to further divide then branding everyone is just a smashingly successful strategy.

There have been quite a few notable terrorist incidents in the US from 9/11/2001 forward, and the vast majority of them have been from people that have a strict, orthodox view of the Koran. To ignore that is foolishness.

To claim that the vast majority of resistance to illegal immigration is is a hatred of brown people is to bring things below the level of a Facebook argument - into the sub-basement of stupidity.

It's like giving interviews on why you lost a race for the presidency of the US and not recognizing that calling 25% of the population a basket of deplorables is incredibly tone deaf and divisive itself.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 09-24-2017, 02:29 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Well, I called out Trump based on his rhetoric during the campaign that absolutely appealed to racists -- or at the very least to people who have an irrational fear of Mexicans and Muslims. It's pretty much that simple.

Trump talked about a Muslim ban, which of course he had to walk back -- and the closest he could get to it and still appease his supporters is the now 6 country ban -- which is pointless given who actually carried out those terrorists acts here and where they were from.

That doesn't have a thing to do with ignoring the ideology behind the attacks -- it's just dumb policy.

He claimed it was about improving the vetting process -- which to my knowledge he hasn't done. That's a pretty good demonstration that the ban was all about pandering.

So at the very least, calling for the ban during the campaign appealed to people who don't think very hard about things. Maybe not racists by definition, but people who are easily bamboozled by simplistic rhetoric designed to appeal to their worst instincts. And I use the word "designed" loosely.

All the candidates called for increased border security. Even Clinton said we need to add more fencing. But that's only going to get you a golf clap.

No, you need to pump up the rhetoric and exaggerate to appeal to people's fears and prejudices.

Of course, it remains to be seen if there's going to be a wall. Trump recently said in typical Trump fashion:

"The WALL, which is already under construction in the form of new renovation of old and existing fences and walls, will continue to be built."

Ha ha ha.

Last edited by Myers; 09-24-2017 at 05:25 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 09-24-2017, 02:55 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

By the way, I don't know anyone who is against the thorough vetting of immigrants or refugees to weed out terrorists. There is already an extensive vetting program in place -- and maybe it can be improved.

And we already vigorously go after suspected terrorists and take the necessary action when we find them.

And logically a lot of the focus is on Islamic extremists.

So what exactly do you propose we should do about terrorism that is legal and rational?

EDIT: Oh yeah -- you're the guy who wanted deport all the relatives of terrorists regardless of whether or not they were connected to the act or if they did anything illegal. So about the "rational" part...

Last edited by Myers; 09-24-2017 at 03:13 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 09-26-2017, 01:44 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
"Based a platform" would be an overstatement -- but to a large number of Trump supporters -- not all of course -- hatred (or at the very least mistrust and prejudice) toward minorities was part of the appeal. See The Wall and the Muslim ban he talked about during the campaign.
I find it difficult to over-simplify things like that. To me it's like saying Obama and his supporters hate Russians because of all the anti-russian rhetoric, the hacking scandal and the sacking of Russian diplomats.

Without going into whether these are smart moves or not -- if you sack a bunch of diplomats purely because they're Russian, is this distrust and prejudice against minorities, or is it an extreme measure taken in extreme (or at least perceived to be extreme) circumstances?

And in turn it's no good in my view just saying anyone who's concerned about migration from war torn countries in the Middle East and North Africa is just paranoid, prejudice and heartless because all these people are just fleeing conflict looking for a better life. Again this works on the assumption that people really know what's going on, that we know who the good guys and the bad guys are, and it's all very simple to understand. This kind of thinking has only made things worse in my mind, it's the kind of thinking that leads to a policy of arming all the good guys thinking everything will be fine.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 09-26-2017, 04:05 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
I find it difficult to over-simplify things like that.
I'll repeat what I said:

"I called out Trump based on his rhetoric during the campaign that absolutely appealed to racists -- or at the very least to people who have an irrational fear of Mexicans and Muslims. It's pretty much that simple."

That held especially true in the primaries and was a key factor in how he differentiated himself from his republican opponents.

Like I said, not a platform, PART of the appeal.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 09-26-2017, 04:43 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
I'll repeat what I said:

"I called out Trump based on his rhetoric during the campaign that absolutely appealed to racists -- or at the very least to people who have an irrational fear of Mexicans and Muslims. It's pretty much that simple."

That held especially true in the primaries and was a key factor in how he differentiated himself from his republican opponents.

Like I said, not a platform, PART of the appeal.
Does the fact that it appeals to some racists make it racist? That's the question. And if not, what if it's not racist, and if it's not racist, then it doesn't matter if it happens to appeal to racists, and we also couldn't say one way or another why it appeals to people, could be prejudice, could be rational deduction.

You see what I struggle with is thinking OK well look I could be Black, I could be Muslim, I could be Mexican, and I could vote for Trump for legitimate reasons... and yet someone would just assume I must be akin to a 'self hating Jew' because his rhetoric appealed to racists...

And this is borne out, plenty of members of each group will have voted for Trump... admitting they did is like painting a bullseye on their forehead.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 09-26-2017, 05:20 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Does the fact that it appeals to some racists make it racist?
Not always easy to make the distinction. There's also a difference between actual or proposed policy and rhetoric used to appeal to a certain segment.

Using racist for lack of a better term -- is proposing a total Muslim ban racist? On Trump's part, it's hard to say, because we can't read his mind.

Given the impracticability of a total ban -- you have to wonder why he would even say it. My guess is, the intention was specifically to appeal to people who have an irrational fear of Muslims. Is that "racist?" You tell me.

Is it always necessary to make the distinction? To me, if some part of your path to the White House includes pumped up rhetoric that appeals to people's worst instincts -- that isn't even based on viable policy -- that's a problem.

Just look at what you get. That's why this idea referred to elsewhere in the thread that "some segment of every candidate's supporters are racist" (and I am paraphrasing) doesn't really wash with me.

Last edited by Myers; 09-26-2017 at 05:41 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 09-26-2017, 06:23 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Is it always necessary to make the distinction? To me, if some part of your path to the White House includes pumped up rhetoric that appeals to people's worst instincts -- that isn't even based on viable policy -- that's a problem.
Awww man that's surely all there is anyway. Politics is mostly a nonsense. Imagine if it was based on truth, I can't imagine the establishment would last very long. They have to use propaganda to keep the whole farce going, and propaganda almost by definition is appealing to people's base instincts, fears and prejudices.

And yes the reasons it's very important to make the distinction is that without it any supporter of a policy or candidate can be labelled a racist. And in turn it means you can't talk about it, 'racism' as a label just shuts down all rational debate before it has even started.

I'll give an example, we have a conspiracy theorist in the UK called David Icke. He a proponent of all kinds of stuff like an impending one world fascist government, which is being brought about by an ancient order whose bloodlines stem from medieval monarchy. Aside from THAT his message is that we're all one, all that is and ever can be, limitless expression which has the capacity to live in a total state of peace and harmony so long as we realise what we really are and so on... all nice flowery stuff not a racist bone in his body.

BUT he has inadvertently picked up a Neo Nazi following -- because he criticises Israel and particularly the Rothschild family which resonates with them quite strongly.

For me this is what I would say about a Muslim ban. It's crazy. But I'd say it's an admission of total failure and a disastrous foreign policy in the Middle East for decades and decades. It's an admission that the West doesn't know and has never really known what it was doing there and that dropping tens of thousands of bombs on the region every year, whilst simultaneously welcoming those the bombs has displaced, all while radical groups warn that they will exploit such a system is also 'a problem'.

The test for whether it's racist might be, would it make a difference if this situation involved any other group of people. Russians, Chinese, Europeans... I think the same concerns would exist.

In short, you can probably have free travel between states, or war, but both is questionable.

Disclaimer before I get shot: not supporting the ban, just pointing out a rationale which is more to do with geopolitics than racism.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 09-26-2017, 06:42 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Awww man that's surely all there is anyway. Politics is mostly a nonsense. Imagine if it was based on truth, I can't imagine the establishment would last very long. They have to use propaganda to keep the whole farce going, and propaganda almost by definition is appealing to people's base instincts, fears and prejudices.
Of course.

But all propaganda is not the same. The results are not the same.

Do you think Trump supporters who cheered at the idea of a Muslim ban were considering "a disastrous foreign policy in the Middle East for decades and decades..." etc. etc.?

No.

The 6 country ban that is now in place is a direct result of his campaign rhetoric. Of course, he had to walk it back. Regardless, it's just dumb policy.

Try taking off your thinking cap for a moment, and put on a red "Make America Great Again" hat...

Last edited by Myers; 09-26-2017 at 06:48 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 09-26-2017, 07:08 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Of course.

But all propaganda is not the same. The results are not the same.

Do you think Trump supporters who cheered at the idea of Muslim ban were considering "a disastrous foreign policy in the Middle East for decades and decades..." etc. etc.?

No.

The 6 country ban that is now in place is a direct result of his campaign rhetoric. Of course, he had to walk it back. Regardless, it's just dumb policy.

Try taking off your thinking cap for a moment, and put on a red "Make America Great Again" hat...
Maybe not the disastrous foreign policy, but I think they could get their head around bombing the hell out of somewhere and how that might affect your immigration policy.

It might be dumb... but really I don't see much that isn't dumb about the West and the Middle East. To put it another way, it's not like the effect is less dumb than the cause. It's part of why I'm an anarchist... I really don't think these people should be given any money to be running around the world doing what they do.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 09-26-2017, 08:08 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Maybe not the disastrous foreign policy, but I think they could get their head around bombing the hell out of somewhere and how that might affect your immigration policy.
I really doubt it -- if you're talking about what the U.S. does.

You're talking about a lot of people who absolutely don't or can't think about the ramifications of our foreign policy and military actions.

They are utterly clueless and can't understand why we aren't loved...
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 09-26-2017, 09:28 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
I really doubt it -- if you're talking about what the U.S. does.

You're talking about a lot of people who absolutely don't or can't think about the ramifications of our foreign policy and military actions.

They are utterly clueless and can't understand why we aren't loved...
Well this is the thing right, it's A LOT of people, pretty much the population of the UK 60 odd mill... they can't all be retarded.

And even if they are, those who are smarter rarely talk about the below when decrying the travel ban as though it just occurred in a vacuum just because Trump is a random lunatic.

"Looking back at President Obama’s legacy, the Council on Foreign Relation’s Micah Zenko added up the defense department’s data on airstrikes and made a startling revelation: in 2016 alone, the Obama administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs. This means that every day last year, the US military blasted combatants or civilians overseas with 72 bombs; that’s three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day.

While most of these air attacks were in Syria and Iraq, US bombs also rained down on people in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. That’s seven majority-Muslim countries."

Y'know, it does confuse me, it's like now all the placards come out because of a travel ban... but not when the bombs were raining down to this degree. In fact these same people seem to think Obama is an all 'round great guy.

Disclaimer: doesn't mean I think Trump is any better... don't think it matters much who fronts the regime.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 09-26-2017, 02:48 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Online)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,740
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

You keep straying from the point I was making -- and I keep letting you sidetrack me.

I'm well aware of the hypocrisy of the Obama administration and the people who howled about the Muslim ban while they were silent about us bombing the shit out of them.

And some people in those countries might even be better off with Trump in office.

My original comment had to do with Trump appealing to racists or at the very least people who are gullible and susceptible to fear mongering when it comes to Mexicans and Muslims. The "they're taking our jobs and rapin' our women" and "what about that there shay-ree-yah law" folks.

I believe it gave him an edge in the primaries and the general election and that more than likely it brought some people to the poles who had previously sat on their hands.

They represent some segment of the so-called disenfranchised people of the heartland who didn't really give a shit about Mitt Romney -- the guy who ran against Obama -- but were thoroughly energized by Trump, beyond his empty promise of jobs. (And of course, you have to factor in the over the top "lock her up" anti-Clinton stuff, which appealed to the same mentality.)

And I think that Trump used racism (not race, in case anyone is thinking about Obama) to his advantage more than any other candidate since the segregationist George Wallace back in 1968 -- especially in the primaries.

Do I know any of this for sure? No -- I have a good idea mostly but not entirely based on the time I've spent in rural Georgia talking to a certain kind of Trump supporter. Can you measure the sheer delight on someone's face when you mention The Wall or the Muslim ban?

Beyond that -- your guess is as good as mine.

Last edited by Myers; 09-27-2017 at 06:03 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 10-10-2017, 06:01 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,635
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...d-not-a-victim

http://metro.co.uk/2017/10/08/people...ok-ad-6985415/

And we have another one. The only thing that annoys me about this is that Dove apologised
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
If Marilyn Monroe were alive today... PickleBottom The Intellectual Table 40 05-01-2017 10:52 AM
Monroe 1.1 Nathaniel J. Costin (+1) [Violence/Adult Content] Sayble Nox Fiction 4 09-14-2014 08:14 AM
The Sad Life of Garrett Monroe juicyfruit Poetry 6 04-20-2014 05:51 PM
The Emperor's Blood. Beaviz81 Fiction 4 12-04-2013 07:05 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:31 AM.

vBulletin, Copyright © 2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.